Nov 05, 2007
The first two decisions by the Competition Commission of Singapore, issued in the first quarter of 2007, represent important milestones in the implementation of competition law in Singapore since the enactment of the Competition Act 2004. Both cases involved cooperation agreements between airline operators who had sought negative clearance through the Commission´s notification process. This article provides an overview of the legal and policy background behind the new competition regime and, in particular, explains how the new statutory provisions concerned with anticompetitive agreements were applied to the two notified agreements described above. An analysis of these two cases is also conducted to illustrate how the competition regulator has interpreted the relevant competition law principles in the course of its decision-making process.
Featured News
Former FTC Litigator Appointed General Counsel of American Antitrust Institute
Jan 20, 2026 by
CPI
FTC Moves to Appeal Meta Antitrust Ruling Over Instagram and WhatsApp Acquisitions
Jan 20, 2026 by
CPI
Deutsche Boerse Nears €5.3 Billion Deal for Allfunds
Jan 20, 2026 by
CPI
Irish Appliance Maker Probed Over Alleged Price-Fixing Practices
Jan 20, 2026 by
CPI
UK Regulator Accuses Meta of Allowing Illegal Gambling Ads
Jan 20, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Recidivism
Jan 21, 2026 by
CPI
Recidivism, Multiple Offending, and Serial Offending in Antitrust
Jan 21, 2026 by
Gregory Werden
Antitrust Recidivism: Why Repeat Cases Appear, and Why True Reoffending Is Rare in the United States
Jan 21, 2026 by
Lisa M. Phelan, Megan S. Golden, Adrienne Irmer & Nina Worth
99 Antitrust Problems – Is Recidivism One?
Jan 21, 2026 by
Brian A. Ratner & Kartik S. Madiraju
Holding A Cat by the Tail: A View of Cartel Recidivism in U.S. Antitrust Enforcement
Jan 21, 2026 by
Mark & KaDee L. Ru